Because of the way Harvard does aid, and because of the massive difference in job prospects, there is no circumstance where Columbia over Harvard makes sense (unless you have some sort of serious personal reason to attend CLS).

BruceWayne wrote:Because of the way Harvard does aid, and because of the massive difference in job prospects, there is no circumstance where Columbia over Harvard makes sense (unless you have some sort of serious personal reason to attend CLS).

BruceWayne wrote:Because of the way Harvard does aid, and because of the massive difference in job prospects, there is no circumstance where Columbia over Harvard makes sense (unless you have some sort of serious personal reason to attend CLS).

super lulz

This. You do realize that more than a handful of people at Harvard strike out each year?

kwais wrote:uceWayne wrote:Because of the way Harvard does aid, and because of the massive difference in job prospects, there is no circumstance where Columbia over Harvard makes sense (unless you have some sort of serious personal reason to attend CLS).

super lulz

Let me break it down for you.

1. Yes in NYC the difference at big firms is not HUGE (but even there it exists). This is the only area where Columbia and Harvard are close period (and again even there Harvard is better) Which leads to...

2. TLS's obsession and essentially made up tier of "CCN" as somehow being very close to Harvard. Here's a newsflash for 90 percent of the TLS public. Outside of this website no one knows what the hell "CCN" or "Top 6" is. Further, outside of the NYC metro area, employers do not consider Harvard and Columbia "close". Many non NYC law firm employers make no distinction between non HYS top 14s. This is something that I noticed a long time ago, and that became especially clear once I actually got into law school and went through the recruiting process. Rayiner noticed it as well through some of his research. Many non NYC firms seem to, by and large, look at Columbia and the rest of CCN as being no different than say Duke. And for the record it isn't just true secondary markets that don't go with the top 6 thing. Also getting a firm job in DC from Harvard>>>>>>>>>getting a firm job in DC from Columbia.

3. Point 2 leads to what is probably the most important difference: if you are from a secondary market and attend HLS you are almost certain to get a firm job in that market regardless of grades. Someone who is from Georgia, attends HLS, and wants Atlanta can get Atlanta period. Someone who attends Columbia with those same connections is below median at Columbia and wants Atlanta: LOL. Same goes for essentially any other secondary market in the country. Sorry but job in secondary market where you're from vs. not even a guaranteed shot at NYC big law= BIG AZZ DIFFERENCE.

4. The difference for clerkships is so big I shouldn't have to mention it.

5. The difference for Fed government jobs is HUGE. Many fed government jobs specifically require 3.0 or 3.3 etc. GPA's REGARDLESS of the school attended. Guess what? HLS doesn't use a GPA system, so BigFed often lets them slide as long as they have a demonstrated interest in government/PI work. Applying to BigFed with a 3.0 or even below a 3.3 from Columbia= LULZ. Mention the absurd number of HLS alums in BigFed and the gap starts to become even more obvious. Also see 4. about clerkships; for many BigFed jobs a fed clerkship is practically a requirement or substantially increases your shot at a job.

One of the fastest ways to realize a poster doesn't know anywhere near as much as they think they do about getting a job is to see if they start with "Top 6" "CCN" or "Columbia and Harvard are really close" comments without qualifying it with, "if you are talking about NYC biglaw". If I see that I pretty much know it's going to go downhill from there.

Bottom line; people at Harvard strike out because of poor bidding and other personal problems. Grades do not automatically cause you to strike out at a firm job at Harvard. Grades alone can EASILY cause you to strike out at Columbia--easily.

And of course, as I alluded to in my first post, the way Harvard does aid is such that no one pays sticker at Harvard unless they are in a situation where paying sticker wouldn't be anything big for them anyway. Thus the scholly argument is basically a moot point.

You. are. an. idiot.

Seriously, the two are so close in career placement that it is not at all crazy to go to Columbia instead, even without money. If you prefer New York and aren't interested in academia, go to Columbia.[/quote

LMAO!!!! There are a LOT of "CCN" students on this board!

Last edited by BruceWayne on Mon Sep 10, 2012 5:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Borg wrote:Seriously, the two are so close in career placement that it is not at all crazy to go to Columbia instead, even without money. If you prefer New York and aren't interested in academia, go to Columbia.

If you exclusively are interested in NYC biglaw and have no connections to secondary markets, you are most likely in a position where going to CLS makes sense. There are probably not many people who are getting into H and not getting a bit more money at CLS/NYU. Though, CLS does suck for placement in Pearson Hardman.

JamMasterJ wrote:If you exclusively are interested in NYC biglaw and have no connections to secondary markets, you are most likely in a position where going to CLS makes sense. There are probably not many people who are getting into H and not getting a bit more money at CLS/NYU. Though, CLS does suck for placement in Pearson Hardman.

Exactly. And even if that does describe you, why would you not give yourself the option to do something else? And even if you do still decide you only want NYC biglaw, you will have an easier time getting that from Harvard anyway! Other than strong personal reasons, it just doesn't make sense to go to Columbia over Harvard.

Part of what makes the decision so easy is the similarity in the two schools' character. I mean really Columbia is the little brother of Harvard. If Harvard is your first choice and you don't get in you go to Columbia. It's not like comparing say Columbia to Berkeley where you're talking about substantially different geographical placement or a stark difference in the career interests of the student bodies.

JamMasterJ wrote:If you exclusively are interested in NYC biglaw and have no connections to secondary markets, you are most likely in a position where going to CLS makes sense. There are probably not many people who are getting into H and not getting a bit more money at CLS/NYU. Though, CLS does suck for placement in Pearson Hardman.

Exactly. And even if that does describe you, why would you not give yourself the option to do something else? And even if you do still decide you only want NYC biglaw, you will have an easier time getting that from Harvard anyway! Other than strong personal reasons, it just doesn't make sense to go to Columbia over Harvard.

Part of what makes the decision so easy is the similarity in the two schools' character. I mean really Columbia is the little brother of Harvard. If Harvard is your first choice and you don't get in you go to Columbia. It's not like comparing say Columbia to Berkeley where you're talking about substantially different geographical placement or a stark difference in the career interests of the student bodies.

I don't think the NYC biglaw difference is substantial. Maybe the bottom 15% is doing a little better from H. My main point is that people getting into Harvard, unless they have extremely high need-based, are probably going to get more money at CLS and NYU. And if you're in the biglaw or bust camp, you're not making a bad choice by picking CLS/NYU over H at, say 60K lower (accounting for NYC costing more).

JamMasterJ wrote:If you exclusively are interested in NYC biglaw and have no connections to secondary markets, you are most likely in a position where going to CLS makes sense. There are probably not many people who are getting into H and not getting a bit more money at CLS/NYU. Though, CLS does suck for placement in Pearson Hardman.

JamMasterJ wrote:I don't think the NYC biglaw difference is substantial. Maybe the bottom 15% is doing a little better from H. My main point is that people getting into Harvard, unless they have extremely high need-based, are probably going to get more money at CLS and NYU. And if you're in the biglaw or bust camp, you're not making a bad choice by picking CLS/NYU over H at, say 60K lower (accounting for NYC costing more).

Definitely. But again why would you not take that advantage when you also get such a big difference in everything else? I mean in secondary markets and DC the difference is huge.

JamMasterJ wrote:I don't think the NYC biglaw difference is substantial. Maybe the bottom 15% is doing a little better from H. My main point is that people getting into Harvard, unless they have extremely high need-based, are probably going to get more money at CLS and NYU. And if you're in the biglaw or bust camp, you're not making a bad choice by picking CLS/NYU over H at, say 60K lower (accounting for NYC costing more).

Definitely. But again why would you not take that advantage when you also get such a big difference in everything else? I mean in secondary markets and DC the difference is huge.

money. I'm not arguing for CLS/NYU over HLS at equal cost. Just pointing out that they probably aren't as far apart as you think, and that there are very rarely situations when the scholly amounts are comparable.

JamMasterJ wrote:I don't think the NYC biglaw difference is substantial. Maybe the bottom 15% is doing a little better from H. My main point is that people getting into Harvard, unless they have extremely high need-based, are probably going to get more money at CLS and NYU. And if you're in the biglaw or bust camp, you're not making a bad choice by picking CLS/NYU over H at, say 60K lower (accounting for NYC costing more).

Definitely. But again why would you not take that advantage when you also get such a big difference in everything else? I mean in secondary markets and DC the difference is huge.

money. I'm not arguing for CLS/NYU over HLS at equal cost. Just pointing out that they probably aren't as far apart as you think, and that there are very rarely situations when the scholly amounts are comparable.

Also, Cambridge blows

To each his own, but I think I'd like Cambridge way more than NYC, at least to actually live in.

JamMasterJ wrote:I don't think the NYC biglaw difference is substantial. Maybe the bottom 15% is doing a little better from H. My main point is that people getting into Harvard, unless they have extremely high need-based, are probably going to get more money at CLS and NYU. And if you're in the biglaw or bust camp, you're not making a bad choice by picking CLS/NYU over H at, say 60K lower (accounting for NYC costing more).

Definitely. But again why would you not take that advantage when you also get such a big difference in everything else? I mean in secondary markets and DC the difference is huge.

money. I'm not arguing for CLS/NYU over HLS at equal cost. Just pointing out that they probably aren't as far apart as you think, and that there are very rarely situations when the scholly amounts are comparable.